The biggest issue is the decision to go backwards, we've already had the high school years, so why not just recast and go with a new adventure like the Bond films used to? Especially when the origin film was made in 2002.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

Why do 90% of the posters in here automatically presume that its going to fail?

It's not that I think it'll fail, it's just not one of the announcements made regarding this film have been remotely exciting, in my opinion of course. Therefore at the moment my anticipation for this flick is zero. - Raimi no more, sure the third movie messed things up, but he had a good eye for exciting action sequences and the larger budget led to some fantastic sequences throughout the trilogy. - 80 million budget. (Which is what Empire are reporting, so that's all I can go by for now) Pretty low for what should be a huge picture. - Webb as a director, nothing he's done has thrilled me so far, so why would I be overly positive regarding the fact that he's been given such a huge IP? - Back to high school again for Spidey's origins. Even though we went through all of it, in movie world, less than 10 yrs ago. - One thing we don't need in Spidey films is more angst or teeny drama, (If you add up all the crying and moping about from the first three it's probably 25% of the total running time) yet this is what Empire believe they're aiming for. Paramount's announcement of more heart, anxiety and teenage recklessness doesn't exactly fill me with hope at getting an action packed comic blockbuster. - James Vanderbilt is writing the story, a quick look on IMDB would reveal that other than Zodiac he hasn't really done much worthwhile.

So yeah, should they get the casting spot on or something else positive is announced my hopes for the flick will rise. Until then I've just got to wait and see.

Clearly the studio and producers have no interest in presenting Spiderman in the view of contuning the work of Raimi or the character's comic roots, merely to squeeze every last $ out of a franchise that as has been said, should have been laid to rest if the decision not to continue with Raimi had been taken.

Yeah cancel a billion dollar franchise because you lose a director.

Ya know just once, for a change, it;d be great to read apost from you that actually acknoweldge's Rami's faults with Spider-Man instead of you bleating endlessly about how he's not involved and how he's so great, get over it. He fucked up big time and was gonna fuck up even more with his insane villain choices.

The budget means jack shit people, all this means is that the focus will be on character, be restricted to probably one villain who doesn't require huge amounts of CGI to create. Something lower key, practical and exciting.

Why do 90% of the posters in here automatically presume that its going to fail?

It's not that I think it'll fail, it's just not one of the announcements made regarding this film have been remotely exciting, in my opinion of course. Therefore at the moment my anticipation for this flick is zero. - Raimi no more, sure the third movie messed things up, but he had a good eye for exciting action sequences and the larger budget led to some fantastic sequences throughout the trilogy. - 80 million budget. (Which is what Empire are reporting, so that's all I can go by for now) Pretty low for what should be a huge picture. - Webb as a director, nothing he's done has thrilled me so far, so why would I be overly positive regarding the fact that he's been given such a huge IP? - Back to high school again for Spidey's origins. Even though we went through all of it, in movie world, less than 10 yrs ago. - One thing we don't need in Spidey films is more angst or teeny drama, (If you add up all the crying and moping about from the first three it's probably 25% of the total running time) yet this is what Empire believe they're aiming for. Paramount's announcement of more heart, anxiety and teenage recklessness doesn't exactly fill me with hope at getting an action packed comic blockbuster. - James Vanderbilt is writing the story, a quick look on IMDB would reveal that other than Zodiac he hasn't really done much worthwhile.

So yeah, should they get the casting spot on or something else positive is announced my hopes for the flick will rise. Until then I've just got to wait and see.

So a director who scores a Grammy (and most likely Oscar) nomination for his debut film, a film which is highly lauded by many isn't a good enough reason to give him a shot at something big? Michael Bay has an eye for action, should we give him a shot? The problem with Raimi is that he can't do complex.

How many writers produce a screenplay as good as Zodiac in an entire career? Based on that alone, I think we're lucky to have such a writer on board for what many are simply assuming is a hokey-teen flick. Welcome to the Jungle is great too. Lets remember that the script for the first Spider-Man film was written by the luminary that brought us The Lost World, Snake Eyes and went on to write the "script" for the fourth Indy flick.

Clearly the studio and producers have no interest in presenting Spiderman in the view of contuning the work of Raimi or the character's comic roots, merely to squeeze every last $ out of a franchise that as has been said, should have been laid to rest if the decision not to continue with Raimi had been taken.

Yeah cancel a billion dollar franchise because you lose a director.

Ya know just once, for a change, it;d be great to read apost from you that actually acknoweldge's Rami's faults with Spider-Man instead of you bleating endlessly about how he's not involved and how he's so great, get over it. He fucked up big time and was gonna fuck up even more with his insane villain choices.

The budget means jack shit people, all this means is that the focus will be on character, be restricted to probably one villain who doesn't require huge amounts of CGI to create. Something lower key, practical and exciting.

Sir, I applaud thee. It was getting lonely in here, being the sole voice of reason.

Why do 90% of the posters in here automatically presume that its going to fail?

It's not that I think it'll fail, it's just not one of the announcements made regarding this film have been remotely exciting, in my opinion of course. Therefore at the moment my anticipation for this flick is zero. - Raimi no more, sure the third movie messed things up, but he had a good eye for exciting action sequences and the larger budget led to some fantastic sequences throughout the trilogy. - 80 million budget. (Which is what Empire are reporting, so that's all I can go by for now) Pretty low for what should be a huge picture. - Webb as a director, nothing he's done has thrilled me so far, so why would I be overly positive regarding the fact that he's been given such a huge IP? - Back to high school again for Spidey's origins. Even though we went through all of it, in movie world, less than 10 yrs ago. - One thing we don't need in Spidey films is more angst or teeny drama, (If you add up all the crying and moping about from the first three it's probably 25% of the total running time) yet this is what Empire believe they're aiming for. Paramount's announcement of more heart, anxiety and teenage recklessness doesn't exactly fill me with hope at getting an action packed comic blockbuster. - James Vanderbilt is writing the story, a quick look on IMDB would reveal that other than Zodiac he hasn't really done much worthwhile.

So yeah, should they get the casting spot on or something else positive is announced my hopes for the flick will rise. Until then I've just got to wait and see.

So a director who scores a Grammy (and most likely Oscar) nomination for his debut film, a film which is highly lauded by many isn't a good enough reason to give him a shot at something big? Michael Bay has an eye for action, should we give him a shot? The problem with Raimi is that he can't do complex.

How many writers produce a screenplay as good as Zodiac in an entire career? Based on that alone, I think we're lucky to have such a writer on board for what many are simply assuming is a hokey-teen flick. Welcome to the Jungle is great too. Lets remember that the script for the first Spider-Man film was written by the luminary that brought us The Lost World, Snake Eyes and went on to write the "script" for the fourth Indy flick.

The talent thus far attached to this picture is positive.

What's the deal with certain posters on here (Normally the ones with thousands under their belts) thinking their opinion is the be all and end all of opinions, usually stating their beliefs as cast iron FACT. I couldn't give two hoots what nominations (500) Days Of Summer got, the fact that you adored the movie also has no effect on my own opinion. I thought it was of slightly higher quality than the usual romantic tosh that comes out of Hollywood but nothing utterly spectacular. ''Ohh it had a quirky narrative structure and a song and dance number in the middle'' Big deal! Therefore Webb as a director hasn't proven himself to me yet, that's all I'm saying. Just accept that not everyone feels the same about certain movie related matters as you, sure throw your opinion in and then try to move on.

Yes Zodiac was good, but let's face it the writer had a wealth of real life material to get his story from and David Fincher directing it, it would've been difficult to screw it up too badly.

What's the deal with certain posters on here (Normally the ones with thousands under their belts) thinking their opinion is the be all and end all of opinions, usually stating their beliefs as cast iron FACT. I couldn't give two hoots what nominations (500) Days Of Summer got, the fact that you adored the movie also has no effect on my own opinion. I thought it was of slightly higher quality than the usual romantic tosh that comes out of Hollywood but nothing utterly spectacular. ''Ohh it had a quirky narrative structure and a song and dance number in the middle'' Big deal! Therefore Webb as a director hasn't proven himself to me yet, that's all I'm saying. Just accept that not everyone feels the same about certain movie related matters as you, sure throw your opinion in and then try to move on.

Yes Zodiac was good, but let's face it the writer had a wealth of real life material to get his story from and David Fincher directing it, it would've been difficult to screw it up too badly.

No need to get upset kiddo.

I simply presented a number of facts, yes facts backing up my reasoning as to why the creative team behind this film was good. I didn't present opinion, just simple fact. You are the one whose view is tarnished by opinion.

Clearly the studio and producers have no interest in presenting Spiderman in the view of contuning the work of Raimi or the character's comic roots, merely to squeeze every last $ out of a franchise that as has been said, should have been laid to rest if the decision not to continue with Raimi had been taken.

Yeah cancel a billion dollar franchise because you lose a director.

Ya know just once, for a change, it;d be great to read apost from you that actually acknoweldge's Rami's faults with Spider-Man instead of you bleating endlessly about how he's not involved and how he's so great, get over it. He fucked up big time and was gonna fuck up even more with his insane villain choices.

The budget means jack shit people, all this means is that the focus will be on character, be restricted to probably one villain who doesn't require huge amounts of CGI to create. Something lower key, practical and exciting.

Sir, I applaud thee. It was getting lonely in here, being the sole voice of reason.

What's the deal with certain posters on here (Normally the ones with thousands under their belts) thinking their opinion is the be all and end all of opinions, usually stating their beliefs as cast iron FACT. I couldn't give two hoots what nominations (500) Days Of Summer got, the fact that you adored the movie also has no effect on my own opinion. I thought it was of slightly higher quality than the usual romantic tosh that comes out of Hollywood but nothing utterly spectacular. ''Ohh it had a quirky narrative structure and a song and dance number in the middle'' Big deal! Therefore Webb as a director hasn't proven himself to me yet, that's all I'm saying. Just accept that not everyone feels the same about certain movie related matters as you, sure throw your opinion in and then try to move on.

Yes Zodiac was good, but let's face it the writer had a wealth of real life material to get his story from and David Fincher directing it, it would've been difficult to screw it up too badly.

No need to get upset kiddo.

I simply presented a number of facts, yes facts backing up my reasoning as to why the creative team behind this film was good. I didn't present opinion, just simple fact. You are the one whose view is tarnished by opinion.

What's the deal with certain posters on here (Normally the ones with thousands under their belts) thinking their opinion is the be all and end all of opinions, usually stating their beliefs as cast iron FACT. I couldn't give two hoots what nominations (500) Days Of Summer got, the fact that you adored the movie also has no effect on my own opinion. I thought it was of slightly higher quality than the usual romantic tosh that comes out of Hollywood but nothing utterly spectacular. ''Ohh it had a quirky narrative structure and a song and dance number in the middle'' Big deal! Therefore Webb as a director hasn't proven himself to me yet, that's all I'm saying. Just accept that not everyone feels the same about certain movie related matters as you, sure throw your opinion in and then try to move on.

Yes Zodiac was good, but let's face it the writer had a wealth of real life material to get his story from and David Fincher directing it, it would've been difficult to screw it up too badly.

No need to get upset kiddo.

I simply presented a number of facts, yes facts backing up my reasoning as to why the creative team behind this film was good. I didn't present opinion, just simple fact. You are the one whose view is tarnished by opinion.

Facts? You said he got a Grammy nomination you div.

What a pompous wanker.

Sorry I meant Globe. That that is the one point you can pull me on, and in such a lyrical manner says much. As does the word "div" about the extent to which your vocabulary reaches.

Probably going to get told to mind my own business but you both have valid opinions, they just both happen to be different. Can't we all just get along? New years resolution normally i'd join in. Pleeeaase.

Well, didn't Ledger's casting come on the back of a hugely impressive performance in Brokeback Mountain? I don't have a problem with Webb per se just that there were more obvious candidates available. i'm sure his film would be quite watchable, as was 500 brackets for no reason Days of Summer, in a low expectation kind of way. The big issue on this is to reboot when there was no apparent need to, other than to reduce costs.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

Every director has to start somewhere for christ's sake. How would any director make a name for themselves if producers weren't going to occasionally take a chance.

Ridley Scott wasn't a big name when he made Alien. James Cameron wasn't a big name when he made Terminator. Neil Blomkamp wasn't a big name when he made District 9.

Can people show a bit of restraint and wait to see what he does with the franchise? If he fucks it up Sony will reboot again within a year and you can all forget about it.

Yeah that's true, so I'm going to chill out on the moaning front as I'm starting to sound like an AICN poster

Alllllthoooough James Cameron is really into the whole sci-fi thing, stating himself that he's read hundreds of comics and books on the genre, so the move into directing The Terminator film wasn't too much of a stretch as it was all based, mainly, on his own ideas and visions. Same with Blomkamp, he'd shown some considerble talent with his minscule budgeted sci-fi shorts before District 9, so it just seemed like the next logical step making that flick. It's just nice to have a director who's interested in the subject matter of which their new film is based, especially when it comes to comic book adaptations, as they get a lot more passionate about keeping it true to its roots. Then again for all I know Webb could freakin' love the Spider-Man comics and stories.

I'll wait until casting begins or other big news hits before I speak negatively/positively on the film again.

Well, didn't Ledger's casting come on the back of a hugely impressive performance in Brokeback Mountain? I don't have a problem with Webb per se just that there were more obvious candidates available. i'm sure his film would be quite watchable, as was 500 brackets for no reason Days of Summer, in a low expectation kind of way. The big issue on this is to reboot when there was no apparent need to, other than to reduce costs.

The reason for the reboot is because Raimi and Maguire walked. Thats the official line anyway.

Oh, and the reason for the brackets in the title of (500) Days of Summer is as a tribute to pop albums of the 1980's. Which you would know if you had actually seen the film.

Well, didn't Ledger's casting come on the back of a hugely impressive performance in Brokeback Mountain? I don't have a problem with Webb per se just that there were more obvious candidates available. i'm sure his film would be quite watchable, as was 500 brackets for no reason Days of Summer, in a low expectation kind of way. The big issue on this is to reboot when there was no apparent need to, other than to reduce costs.

That I will definitely agree.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978 There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.